my bad, 645 down equipment, about a third of that is monitored routers. but even this number still makes me want to go there
On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 10:32 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > You have 600 customers on 320 WiMAX? That would make a person look > forward to dying and going to the bad place. > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy > /sarcasm > *Sent:* Thursday, October 6, 2016 9:54 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] *&%$ 320 > > > > good night to bring down 600 customers on purpose, ive never done that > before > > > > i know the water company called me yesterday about their system on 917.5 > mhz croaking out on them, dont know what killed 900mhz, i ficgured it was > com ed pushing out fram eureka or wherever. if they start puttin up wimax, > i shooting every comed guy i see in the cock with a pellet gun > > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 9:25 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > GE MDS is pushing 3.65 SCADA allot > > > > On Oct 6, 2016 8:17 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <af...@kwisp.com> wrote: > > George, is this due to some weird weather by you? > > > > Oh, and one thing to consider if you have 3.65 interference, I found out > ComEd is using 3.65 WiMAX for smartgrid, I don’t know if this is the top of > the hierarchy for their 900 MHz stuff, or SCADA to substations. One tower > by me they have 4 sectors and I think each AP only feeds 1-2 CPEs. It > didn’t help that they totally messed up the lat/lon of their tower when > they registered it in ULS. Once I looked at the CPE locations and drew > lines following the stated azimuth, I saw they converged on a tower next to > a ComEd facility. > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy > /sarcasm > *Sent:* Thursday, October 6, 2016 9:05 PM > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] *&%$ 320 > > > > lol well it wont be coming from us for a while, we are going 3ghz silent > > > > On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 8:58 PM, George Skorup <geo...@cbcast.com> wrote: > > Dude, I'm seeing multipath and ducting like a somebitch. Started around > dusk. Don't beat your head into your desk. I'm seeing some 11GHz links go > from their nominal -45ish to like -35 to -60 in just a couple minutes, and > BER alarms like crazy. This is teh suck. > > > > On 10/6/2016 8:47 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote: > > There is some nutty madness going on on a large portion of our 320 > network, it has hit multiple sites at once. > > I know much of its self induced due to too many marginal installs on very > limited access points > > > > good CINR to SMs, even matrix B I cant even get into to manage. > > > > uplink MCS for the most part looks good until i get into the frame > utilization, tons of 16qam 1/2 and 100% usage with only 6-12 mbps throughput > > > > I have been shifting frequencies across the network because it presented > like interference, and a change on one AP results in required cascade > changes across the 3ghz network since 320 sync doesnt actually work. > > > > APs are basically default layer 2, no profiles changed, 7mhz channels > mostly ABCD 90s and some split APs. sub counts range from 10 to 35 > > > > I migrated a distant part of the network to 10mhz channels and am not > seeing this issue, but subscriber counts are low > > > > Im at my wits end on this nonsense and am about to just put every AP on > the network in SA mode to get a visual on what my spectrum looks like > > > > we did turn up a 450 facing southwest ten miles south of another 320 AP > thats facing south, it blinded the SMs to the 320 on a near channel even > though they were only in the back lobe, but this is far from the others > > > > any advice from you other guys stuck with wimax would be appreciated > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > > > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team > as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
